Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Here's my proposed services, and theres probably a million and one reasons why these are the most utterly stupid and butchered services Southeast London has ever seen:
2tph Charing X to Sevenoaks (same as before)
2tph Cannon St to Sevenoaks via Swanley
2tph Charing X to Hayes avoiding Lewisham (same as before)
2tph Cannon St to Hayes & Orpington (dividing at New Beckenham)
2tph Victoria to Orpington
2tph Blackfriars to Beckenham Junction via Herne Hill
2tph Victoria to Dartford via Lewisham and Woolwich
2tph Cannon St to Cannon St via Greenwich and Sidcup (both clockwise and anticlockwise)
2tph Charing X to Dartford via Bexleyheath
2tph Cannon St to Gravesend via Bexleyheath
2tph Charing X to Gravesend via Sidcup
2tph Bromley North to London Victoria via Lewisham
So only a slow service Cannon Street to Orpington (via New Beckingham)? I remember when there was a rush hour service Cannon Street to Orpington calling only at Pett's Wood (17.22 and 17.42). I know commuting patterns have changed, but surely a Cannon Street direct to Orpington service is still required.
Pre Covid Bexleyheath was 6tph off-peak and 10tph peak. The existing rolling stock constrained timetable isn't far off that (6tph shoulder off-peak and 8tph high peak).
Have the East London and Elizabeth lines suffered through drastic cuts? No they haven’t bit of a non comparable situation, SE hasn’t had growth because they refuse to reinstate services cut in 2022.
Really? I don’t come from anywhere near south London and the main transport complaint that I hear about the area is the lack of tube service. The only easy way to rectify this would be through simplifying the service pattern and giving a higher frequency to these lines.
That might’ve been the complaint 15-20 years ago, and probably is still in some boroughs, but in the past 1/4 of a century, the Jubilee has been extended into Southeast London, the DLR has expanded exponentially, the East London/“Windrush” line has been extended to Crystal Palace and Croydon, and the Elizabeth line has opened, together this has somewhat negated the need for a tube line.
SE has a “simplified” pattern and passengers have voted with their feet, hence why service levels haven’t returned to pre Covid levels.
The Dartford lines shouldn’t be treated like a metro, even if you do one line to one terminal you still have different stopping patterns, some services extend far beyond London, then there are Loop services, these loop services exist because there isn’t enough space to terminate trains at Dartford or Gravesend, this is possibly one reason why this area will never become part if the Overground.
No trains from Sidcup to London Bridge is truly outrageous. I agree the Lewisham > Victoria service should originate from that side of the Lewisham junction though.
Not sure I understand what this is supposed to achieve. Do not forget that 4tph to Blackfriars is accessible from a change at Herne Hill. I think 4 tph to Victoria is better for this route, and termination at Bromley or Swanley is good. Swanley is a location that has a free platform for terminations that is underused, as well as Beck Jnc.
Most people in SE London don’t care with having their services run tube/metro style to one terminal, the choice in terminal is what draws a lot of people to this part of the world.
I think the balance that needs to be reached between frequency and a variety of terminals is just having a high frequency to one terminal. For example, if the Bexleyheath line had services focussed to Cannon Street it would be a lot simpler. I think we have to be realistic, and 6tph is probably the best this line will ever have off-peak. If a structured service is formed between Cannon Street and Barnehurst passengers know what to expect, where to change etc. If you miss a train at 6tph, you have 9 minutes if you're standing on the platform when it leaves. You change at Lewisham for Victoria. Instead of alighting at Charing Cross and switching to the Underground for Holborn, you exit at Cannon Street and join the Central line from Bank. Flows will adapt, people will change their patterns and life will move on.
Everytime the choice of Southeastern terminals comes up there's a really common misconception that is made about why people choose a terminal. Do people really work in the region of Charing Cross or Victoria? Is that what makes them superior destinations? It's the onward connections that does. People like to say that Cannon Street is a poor terminal and that Charing Cross is better. But Cannon Street is Via London Bridge which has strong connections itself, and the connections of Bank/Monument are also the connections of Cannon Street. And I ask the people that make this argument - what makes Cannon Street a poor terminal but Liverpool Street a good one? These are down the road from each other and have similar Underground connections. And Liverpool Street is sitting on the fringes of the city and zone 1 boundary. With the way @NorthKent1989 speaks of it, you would have thought that Charing X is heaven. I am very interested in seeing what people do when they arrive at a terminal, and what % of arrivals at Charing Cross continue to Underground. Then what lines, final dest etc.
4 tph - London Cannon Street <> Dartford (Via Bexleyheath)
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (Via Bexleyheath) 3 tph - London Cannon Street <> Rochester (via Bexleyheath)
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Dartford (Via Sidcup)
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Gravesend (Via Sidcup)
2 tph - Victoria <> Dartford (Via Sidcup) 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Sidcup 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green via Sidcup
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (via Greenwich) continuing to London Cannon Street via Bexleyheath 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (via Greenwich) continuing to London Cannon Street via Sidcup
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Rainham (via Greenwich) 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Gravesend (via Greenwich) 2 tph - London Cannon Street (Or originating from Plumstead) <> Maidstone West (calling at Greenwich, Woolwich Arsenal, Abbey Wood, Dartford, Gravesend, Higham, Strood, and semi-fast to Maidstone West copying the calling pattern of HS1) An end to Lewisham <> Charlton direct journeys. This may be unpopular. I believe this journey can be easily made by connecting to the Lewisham DLR line.
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Hayes via Lewisham
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Hayes not via Lewisham
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Orpington via Lewisham
2 tph - Cannon Street <> Orpington calling at New Cross, St Johns but not Lewisham
fast services to Hastings call additionally at Chelsfield, Knockholt and Dunton Green
2 tph - Luton <> Swanley via Catford (terminating at Kentish Town or West Hampstead off-peak or on Sundays)
2 tph - Welwyn GC <> Sevenoaks via Catford I am wary of a lack of paths and resilience at Orpington. It also makes more sense to me to strengthen services on one route rather than maintaining spurs.
4 tph - London Victoria <> Orpington via Herne Hill 2 tph - London Blackfriars <> Beckenham Junction
So only a slow service Cannon Street to Orpington (via New Beckingham)? I remember when there was a rush hour service Cannon Street to Orpington calling only at Pett's Wood (17.22 and 17.42). I know commuting patterns have changed, but surely a Cannon Street direct to Orpington service is still required.
No trains from Sidcup to London Bridge is truly outrageous. I agree the Lewisham > Victoria service should originate from that side of the Lewisham junction though.
Not sure I understand what this is supposed to achieve. Do not forget that 4tph to Blackfriars is accessible from a change at Herne Hill. I think 4 tph to Victoria is better for this route, and termination at Bromley or Swanley is good. Swanley is a location that has a free platform for terminations that is underused, as well as Beck Jnc.
4 tph - London Cannon Street <> Dartford (Via Bexleyheath)
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (Via Bexleyheath) 3 tph - London Cannon Street <> Rochester (via Bexleyheath)
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Dartford (Via Sidcup)
2 tph - Charing Cross <> Gravesend (Via Sidcup)
2 tph - Victoria <> Dartford (Via Sidcup) 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Sidcup
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green via Sidcup
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (via Greenwich) continuing to London Cannon Street via Bexleyheath 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Slade Green (via Greenwich) continuing to London Cannon Street via Sidcup
2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Rainham (via Greenwich) 2 tph - London Cannon Street <> Gravesend (via Greenwich)
This alone shows you can’t turn the Dartford lines into some strict metro as you’ve previously claimed? Why does the Sidcup line get three London terminals if you said that unworkable and not “metro” enough?
(Or originating from Plumstead) <> Maidstone West (calling at Greenwich, Woolwich Arsenal, Abbey Wood, Dartford, Gravesend, Higham, Strood, and semi-fast to Maidstone West copying the calling pattern of HS1)
An end to Lewisham <> Charlton direct journeys. This may be unpopular. I believe this journey can be easily made by connecting to the Lewisham DLR line
So Tunbridge Wells and beyond should have slower services? Maybe you could have the Tunbridge Wells terminators call at these stations but not Hastings
I think the balance that needs to be reached between frequency and a variety of terminals is just having a high frequency to one terminal. For example, if the Bexleyheath line had services focussed to Cannon Street it would be a lot simpler
Simpler for who? Not the passengers, and why is Cannon Street such a big deal to you? Cannon Street unlike Liverpool Street is a dead zone off peak, it’s really a peak time only station, Liverpool Street backs onto Bishopsgate Market and Shoreditch that’s why it’s more popular.
There are far more users on the Dartford lines from Dartford in, than beyond. And Gravesend is the only busy station until Medway, and HS1 is available and far quicker.
So it should 100% be treated as a London metro - with a few longer tails - to service the London rider majority. And some of those tails should go via Abbey Wood (as well as HS1 / Gravesend interchange) - to also enable faster journeys.
If you live in, eg Higham - you have St P, Elizabeth via Abbey Wood, London Bridge and one other / imo Cannon St —- assuming a Rainham type service.
That is plenty of choice, far more than most routes offer. Greenwich/Lewisham DLR too. Be grateful.
Have the East London and Elizabeth lines suffered through drastic cuts? No they haven’t bit of a non comparable situation, SE hasn’t had growth because they refuse to reinstate services cut in 2022.
That might’ve been the complaint 15-20 years ago, and probably is still in some boroughs, but in the past 1/4 of a century, the Jubilee has been extended into Southeast London, the DLR has expanded exponentially, the East London/“Windrush” line has been extended to Crystal Palace and Croydon, and the Elizabeth line has opened, together this has somewhat negated the need for a tube line.
SE has a “simplified” pattern and passengers have voted with their feet, hence why service levels haven’t returned to pre Covid levels.
The Dartford lines shouldn’t be treated like a metro, even if you do one line to one terminal you still have different stopping patterns, some services extend far beyond London, then there are Loop services, these loop services exist because there isn’t enough space to terminate trains at Dartford or Gravesend, this is possibly one reason why this area will never become part if the Overground.
Grateful to what exactly? The subpar timetable? Increased journey times? We can only be grateful with what TfL has given us not what SE have taken and won’t reinstate.
Grateful to what exactly? The subpar timetable? Increased journey times? We can only be grateful with what TfL has given us not what SE have taken and won’t reinstate
That the rail network has so many options and connections to the different employment centres and hubs in London. Many don’t. It’s already likely the most diverse set of options. 3 DLR links!!! I missed Woolwich before
I appreciate the frequency and simplicity has suffered - but it should be 6tph / metro / Cannon St focused and stoppers, with a couple of targeted exceptions.
And yes to the home building - those folks should also have high frequency access to Abbey Wood and certainly, London Bridge and the City. It’s sufficient.
Harrow on the Hill has both Chiltern & Met services also the Bakerloo and Watford lines nearby
The Ruislips have the Met, Piccadilly and Central lines
There is nowhere in London now that is completely without options and alternatives, ironically you’re speaking really of Southeast London which was isolated until the early noughties.
I personally don’t see the issue of having both CHX and CST services on all lines where possible, the Greewich line plus St.John’s & New Cross are permanently locked into CST we know.
Grateful to what exactly? The subpar timetable? Increased journey times? We can only be grateful with what TfL has given us not what SE have taken and won’t reinstate.
So you want DfT to do what TfL does. Good. Why not go a step further and let TfL take over?
Yes, you can restore the pre-Covid timetable (rolling stock willing), but the pre-Covid timetable never performed satisfactorily. The 2016 franchise competition
Timetable land to frequency land is a paradigm shift. You no longer travel deterministically - you travel stochastically. You bin the timetable - you simply turn up and catch the next train. This is something you couldn't do well with the pre-Covid timetable.
- Your journey starts at Charing Cross. If you miss your direct half-hourly service you catch the next train to London Bridge. You then have to check which platform your next train departs from
- Your NR journey starts at London Bridge. You check which platform your next train departs from and check for delays. You can't get on the first train. You go to a different platform for the next train but because of flighting at the London Bridge end you miss it. You go back down again.
- Low frequencies to Lewisham which is no good if you work in Canary Wharf; people drive for short-distance trips to Lewisham
- Lewisham does not have dedicated Charing Cross or Cannon Street platforms
- Multiple conflicts in the Lewisham area means your trains are always late and you always end up having to ad-lib.
A simplified timetable takes away all of that. At London Bridge every route departs from a single platform / island (they'll need to be disciplined about platforms 1 and 2). You don't check screens and break the flow on the concourse, you just autopilot to your line's platform (e.g. Greenwich and Sidcup 1, Bexleyheath and Charlton 2, Hayes and Grove Park 6/7; North Kent peaks 1, all other outers 6/7). It'd be absolutely liberating. That's how Windrush and Elizabeth line passengers travel.
So you want DfT to do what TfL does. Good. Why not go a step further and let TfL take over?
Yes, you can restore the pre-Covid timetable (rolling stock willing), but the pre-Covid timetable never performed satisfactorily. The 2016 franchise competition
Timetable land to frequency land is a paradigm shift. You no longer travel deterministically - you travel stochastically. You bin the timetable - you simply turn up and catch the next train. This is something you couldn't do well with the pre-Covid timetable.
- Your journey starts at Charing Cross. If you miss your direct half-hourly service you catch the next train to London Bridge. You then have to check which platform your next train departs from
- Your NR journey starts at London Bridge. You check which platform your next train departs from and check for delays. You can't get on the first train. You go to a different platform for the next train but because of flighting at the London Bridge end you miss it. You go back down again.
- Multiple conflicts in the Lewisham area means your trains are always late and you always end up having to ad-lib.
A simplified timetable takes away all of that. At London Bridge every route departs from a single platform / island (they'll need to be disciplined about platforms 1 and 2). You don't check screens and break the flow on the concourse, you just autopilot to your line's platform (e.g. Greenwich and Sidcup 1, Bexleyheath and Charlton 2, Hayes and Grove Park 6/7; North Kent peaks 1, all other outers 6/7). It'd be absolutely liberating. That's how Windrush and Elizabeth line passengers travel.
People got by for decades coping with both terminals on a line, you absolutely cannot compare the ELL/Windrush & the Liz - both built and constructed to be metro lines with lines built to main line standards you keep making these false equivalences.
The whole Lewisham Junction excuse is just that an excuse, it’s hardly Camden Town on the Northern line.
We have a simplified timetable and passengers have abandoned SE
Harrow on the Hill has both Chiltern & Met services also the Bakerloo and Watford lines nearby
The Ruislips have the Met, Piccadilly and Central lines
There is nowhere in London now that is completely without options and alternatives, ironically you’re speaking really of Southeast London which was isolated until the early noughties.
I personally don’t see the issue of having both CHX and CST services on all lines where possible, the Greewich line plus St.John’s & New Cross are permanently locked into CST we know.
Selected locations have lines crossing, but most stations have services going one way only. It's the same on the Dartford lines.
The Woolwich line has Cannon Street, Crossrail and the DLR. Lewisham has Cannon Street, Charing Cross, Victoria and the DLR. In my plan Sidcup has Cannon Street and Victoria. Orpington has Charing Cross, Thameslink and Victoria.
So even with simplification, Southeastern land still has multiple options, more so than many other areas of London.
Selected locations have lines crossing, but most stations have services going one way only. It's the same on the Dartford lines.
The Woolwich line has Cannon Street, Crossrail and the DLR. Lewisham has Cannon Street, Charing Cross, Victoria and the DLR. In my plan Sidcup has Cannon Street and Victoria. Orpington has Charing Cross, Thameslink and Victoria.
So even with simplification, Southeastern land still has multiple options, more so than many other areas of London.
They didn't. They suffered decades of poor reliability and an inability to increase frequencies.
you absolutely cannot compare the ELL/Windrush & the Liz - both built and constructed to be metro lines with lines built to main line standards you keep making these false equivalences.
Here you are plain wrong. Camden Town is far simpler than Lewisham. Camden Town only has diverting and converging moves and they are all parallel moves. The junctions around Lewisham are all flat junctions and they absolutely kill capacity and performance. A Blackheath - Nunhead move cannot be made simultaneously with a Hither Green - St Johns move; whereas swap the pairings and you get a parallel move. The Southeastern timetable depends on all parallel moves to be made on time - invariably they never are and services are always late.
We have a simplified timetable and passengers have abandoned SE
Crossrail would always have the lion's share of passengers for the Woolwich line. Wanting Southeastern to retain market share there is looking in the wrong place.
The number one driver of custom is frequency (then reliability). Short-term frequency is constrained by rolling stock. Once rolling stock is in place the complex timetable constraint will come back.
As someone who spent 20 plus years commuting from this part of the world, I shall respectfully say you are wrong on every level, in the 2000s the Woolwich line had 8tph, Bexleyheath had 6tph, only the Sidcup line had 4tph because it was th quieter of the Dartford lines.
We had delays on occasions but delays still happen today with the “simplified timetable”
It hasn't been simplified enough. Still too many crossing moves at Lewisham Cross Junction; outer services still go to both CST and CHX still cross Courthill Loop South (requires parallel move of Grove Park - Lewisham); Grove Park - Charing Cross Lewisham avoiders still cross Parks Bridge. All of that is a perfect cocktail for propagating delays.
No trains from Sidcup to London Bridge is truly outrageous. I agree the Lewisham > Victoria service should originate from that side of the Lewisham junction though.
Would running the stoppers from the Grove Park route to Victoria be any less bad? I get why Victoria may not be the first choice of terminus, but if you want a better, simpler, more reliable timetable separating the Victoria route as much as possible is the way to go.
The current 2tph frequency from Lewisham to Victoria is a waste of time, and running it through to Bexleyheath creates unnecessary conflicting moves at Lewisham. A 4tph service split between Victoria and London Bridge is rubbish and should be avoided if at all possible(*). One option might be to split the Victoria services with 2tph to each of Sidcup/Grove Park on top of 4tph from Charing Cross, but that would impact reliability and where do you terminate the extra trains?
(*) See the current service on the Bexleyheath line, which is that plus a random hourly service to Charing Cross, resulting in 23 minute gaps between trains, and 30 minutes between services to Victoria or London Bridge.
I feel that there should be some basic principles to bear in mind when it comes to rewriting the timetable for South East London.
Accept that Greenwich and St John’s are never going to have trains to anywhere other than Cannon Street at the London end, so make these into two high frequency metro cores with at least 6tph each: Cannon Street - Westcombe Park and Cannon Street - St John’s. There should ideally be no Thameslink involvement on this route whatsoever.
At least 4tph on the above line east of Charlton should continue to Gravesend, with 2tph of those running on a skip-stop pattern to Rainham.
Victoria should have 4tph to Lewisham, but where it continues on from there shouldn’t matter so much. What must be borne in mind is that if continuing on the Bexleyheath or Woolwich lines, this will involve crossing moves at Lewisham, so you would be more limited in how many trains from St John’s continue through Lewisham.
Trains serving both St John’s and Hither Green should NOT run via Lewisham. These should use the relief tracks parallel to the SEML fast tracks.
You could completely segregate the flows at Lewisham if you really want to, so that all St John’s trains continue to Blackheath while platforms 1 & 2 are left with the Victoria and Charing Cross fast line trains. This completely eliminates conflicting moves at Lewisham, but means Blackheath and Bexleyheath are also locked into Cannon Street, and may be seen as a retrograde step by users of the line who currently have a choice of three London terminals.
Woolwich Line east of Charlton should have at least 8tph. Bexleyheath and Sidcup lines at least 6tph. Hayes and Hither Green - Orpington slows at least 4tph.
At least 2tph on the Sidcup Line should run to Charing Cross, ideally on the fast lines avoiding Lewisham.
If you really wanted to, you could go up to 8tph each on the Greenwich and St John’s lines. If I was doing it this way, I would start with the following for simplicity’s sake:
4tph Cannon Street - Greenwich - Dartford - Gravesend. 2tph continue to Rainham and run semi-fast between Charlton and Dartford.
Cannon Street - Greenwich - Sidcup - St John’s - Cannon Street rounder. 4tph in each direction.
Cannon Street - St John’s - Lewisham - Charlton - Bexleyheath - Cannon Street rounder. 2tph in each direction.
4tph Victoria - Lewisham - Bexleyheath - Dartford.
4tph Charing Cross - Hayes, 2tph of which avoid Lewisham.
4tph Charing Cross - Orpington, 2tph of which continue to Sevenoaks and avoid Lewisham.
2tph Charing Cross - Gravesend, via Lewisham and Sidcup. This could run semi-fast between Hither Green and Dartford.
The best thing for South Eastern is some kind of Crossrail that serves both Cannon Street and Charing Cross. Something along the Fleet Line path perhaps. Of course, it means the connectivity at Waterloo East would be lost.
Okay, the real best thing would be two Crossrails. One running via the West End and one through the city, with massive underground cross-platform interchange provision at somewhere like London Bridge.
Those Chiltern examples were a bit BS - the Ruislips (nearby trains don’t count, they’re not interchanges) - and things like the Jubilee and Overground are adjacent. Met from Harrow is duplicative etc - there aren’t choices of termini or high frequency links to any places.
Compare someone living in Beaconsfield to someone living in Dartford. Yes shorter journeys as a mainline w express services, but not great options for city, for docklands, single terminus with one shabby tube line. Vs a choice of Charing Cross, Cannon St, London Bridge, Waterloo east… and connections to City airport and Docklabds via three DLR interchanges. SE London is no longer isolated - I would say SW is far worse off now in service.
Anyway it’s not a race to the bottom - but simplicity and frequency are unlocks, it’s proven over and over again. 2tph to 3 different patterns and places is not that.
Those Chiltern examples were a bit BS - the Ruislips (nearby trains don’t count, they’re not interchanges) - and things like the Jubilee and Overground are adjacent. Met from Harrow is duplicative etc - there aren’t choices of termini or high frequency links to any places.
Not BS at all, the Met is duplicative but it does connect the North West of London with the West End and the City on one line, so it gives Harrow and points Northwest a choice between a fast Chiltern to the West End or with one train you ca reach the city via the Met.
Worse in what way? In terms of connectivity via Richmond you can get the District Line to the heart of the city, but going to Waterloo changing at Bank would be a quicker option, also Richmond connects to North London without passing through Zone 1.
Via Wimbledon you connect with th District to both Edgware Rd and the City, Thameslink to the City and North London and the trams to other parts of South London, then there’s Clapham Junction itself.
But let’s be honest large parts of the city off peak and weekends are a dead zone except around Liverpool Street.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Here are my one line to one terminal ideas if this is what people really want.
Greenwich Line:
Cannon Street to Slade Green 6tph, 2tph continue to Charing Cross via Sidcup, 2tph continue to Dartford, 2toh continue to Gravesend:
Woolwich Line:
Kentish Town to Rainham via Blackheath, 2tph, semi fast after Charlton.
Bexleyheath Line:
London Victoria to Dartford, 2tph continue to Gravesend
Sidcup Line:
Charing Cross to Crayford, 2tph continue to Cannon Street via Greenwich, 2tph continue to Gravesend
This is where it’ll get tricky
Grove Park Line:
Cannon Street to Orpington, not calling at Lewisham, 4tph
Charing Cross to Sevenoaks, 2tph calling at Lewisham
Hayes Line:
Charing Cross to Hayes, 4tph, 2tph avoid Lewisham
This is what a potential 1 line to one terminal would look like. Some services would get 2tph to a specific area such as the Grove Park and Hayes routes getting 2tph to Lewisham.
One line would have to change at Blackheath or Lewisham for London Bridge whether that’s the Bexleyheath line or Sidcup line that goes to Victoria.
Factoring in loop services as Dartford and Gravesend cannot realistically handle the amount of trains terminating there, factoring in direct access to Abbey Wood for the EL.
Not a perfect solution in fact far from it, but the Woolwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup lines each get a West End terminal (St.Pancras straddles both West End and City but it’s not far from Euston which is a West End terminus) and you’ve ironed out the lines.
As I said this will be a hard sell, and I’m sure people will find fault in this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The best thing for South Eastern is some kind of Crossrail that serves both Cannon Street and Charing Cross. Something along the Fleet Line path perhaps. Of course, it means the connectivity at Waterloo East would be lost.
Some one a while ago posted a proposal from the early 2000s which proposed a “Fleet Line Metro” running from Green Park through the old Jubilee line tunnels to Charing Cross onto Cannon Street then onto the Greenwich line.
Some one a while ago posted a proposal from the early 2000s which proposed a “Fleet Line Metro” running from Green Park through the old Jubilee line tunnels to Charing Cross onto Cannon Street then onto the Greenwich line.
It was a good proposal obviously it was planned before they decided to send the Elizabeth line (Crossrail in those days) to Abbey Wood.
Under those proposals it saw CST closing, Woolwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup lines funneled through the Thameslink core, Greenwich line becoming the Fleet Line, everything SEML into CHX.
Worse in what way? In terms of connectivity via Richmond you can get the District Line to the heart of the city, but going to Waterloo changing at Bank would be a quicker option, also Richmond connects to North London without passing through Zone 1.
Via Wimbledon you connect with th District to both Edgware Rd and the City, Thameslink to the City and North London and the trams to other parts of South London, then there’s Clapham Junction itself.
These are both slow as heck, they’re the ends of the line. It’s like saying get on at Upminster (or West Ruislip!) - Vauxhall is the secret weapon
C2C, like SET, has seen a ton of improvement in terms of interim stations becoming hubs (West Ham especially but Limehouse and Barking growth too) - JLE and DLR making a lot of difference vs the old days and Fenchurch having little onward.
But let’s digress! I’ll go back and read the actual service patterns.
The District line branches at Wimbledon and Richmond are akin to the DLR at Woolwich and Lewisham.
The SWR serving a single terminus at Waterloo is like Dartford lines only going as far as London Bridge. That there's a Charing Cross branch providing tube-level penetration is a bonus.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
